The Comelec dismissed a complaint filed by Kilosbayan alleging election violations against respondents. Kilosbayan did not submit any evidence to prove the allegations. Kilosbayan argued that it is the Comelec's duty to investigate and gather evidence for complaints. However, the Supreme Court held that the burden is on the complainant to prove the case, not the Comelec. As Kilosbayan failed to present evidence, the Comelec properly dismissed the complaint. The preliminary investigation is for facilitating exchange of evidence between parties, not for the Comelec to search for evidence to prove the complainant's case.
The Comelec dismissed a complaint filed by Kilosbayan alleging election violations against respondents. Kilosbayan did not submit any evidence to prove the allegations. Kilosbayan argued that it is the Comelec's duty to investigate and gather evidence for complaints. However, the Supreme Court held that the burden is on the complainant to prove the case, not the Comelec. As Kilosbayan failed to present evidence, the Comelec properly dismissed the complaint. The preliminary investigation is for facilitating exchange of evidence between parties, not for the Comelec to search for evidence to prove the complainant's case.
The Comelec dismissed a complaint filed by Kilosbayan alleging election violations against respondents. Kilosbayan did not submit any evidence to prove the allegations. Kilosbayan argued that it is the Comelec's duty to investigate and gather evidence for complaints. However, the Supreme Court held that the burden is on the complainant to prove the case, not the Comelec. As Kilosbayan failed to present evidence, the Comelec properly dismissed the complaint. The preliminary investigation is for facilitating exchange of evidence between parties, not for the Comelec to search for evidence to prove the complainant's case.
KILOSBAYAN, INC., FERNANDO A. SANTIAGO, QUINTIN S. DOROMAL, EMILIO C. CAPULONG JR., RAFAEL G. FERNANDO, petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, SALVADOR ENRIQUEZ, FRANKLIN DRILON, CESAR SARINO, LEONORA V. DE JESUS, TIBURCIO RELUCIO, RONALDO V. PUNO, BENITO R. CATINDIG, MANUEL CALUPITAN III, VICENTE CARLOS, FRANCISCO CANCIO, JIMMY DURANTE, MELVYN MENDOZA, respondents. FACTS: The Comelec received from petitioner Kilosbayan a letter informing the former of two serious violations of election laws and requesting that these offenses and malpractices be investigated. Kilosbayan did not submit evidence to prove its case. Thus, COMELEC dismiss the charges. Petitioner Kilosbayan, however, brushed off responsibility for adducing evidence of herein respondents' culpability, and adamantly demanded that the Comelec perform its constitutional duty of prosecution election offenses upon any, even meager, information of alleged commission of election offenses. ISSUE: WON commit any act constituting grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioner Kilosbayan's complaint against herein respondents, the former having failed to prove its case against the latter HELD: The contention of petitioner Kilosbayan that it is the Comelec that is duty-bound to search for evidence to prove its letter-complaint is downright erroneous. The task of the Comelec as investigator and prosecutor, acting upon any election offense complaint, is not the physical searching and gathering of proof in support of a complaint for an alleged commission of an election offense. A complainant, who in effect accuses another person of having committed an act constituting an election offense, has the burden, as it is his responsibility, to follow through his accusation and prove his complainant. If the complainant fails to proffer the necessary evidence to show probable cause, notwithstanding the lack of denial or any evidence in controversion, of the accusation, the complaint must be dismissed, since any person accused of a crime is presumed innocent and does not at all have to make a response or reaction to the charges against him. The Comelec, in acting upon an election offense complaint in the course of preliminary investigation, initially facilitates the confrontation process between the complainant and the respondents by requiring the submission of and interfacing, their respective evidences. Ultimately, the Comelec passes upon the contending parties' respective submission and proofs and weighs the fact and circumstances established therefrom. Contrary to the asseveration of petitioner Kilosbayan, the preliminary investigation is not an occasion for the Comelec to, as a duty, spoonfeed the complainant with evidence needed to prove its case. WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby DISMISSED.
United States v. Gary Lynn Hardison, United States of America v. Gale Lee Oliver, Jr., United States of America v. Gary Lynn Hardison, United States of America v. Gary Lynn Hardison, 106 F.3d 393, 4th Cir. (1997)